header-logo header-logo

Peers inflict pain on May’s Bill

10 May 2018
Issue: 7792 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-detail

The government has suffered its 14th defeat in the House of Lords on the Brexit Bill after Peers voted for the UK to remain in the Single Market.

Peers voted 245-218 for the cross-party amendment, brought by Labour’s Lord Ali, for the UK to negotiate continued membership of the Single Market (European Economic Area) with 83 Labour Peers defying the whip to do so.

Peers also voted in favour of a cross-party amendment to remove the 29 March 2019 departure date from the EU Withdrawal Bill. The Duke of Wellington, who proposed the amendment, said it gave the House of Commons ‘an opportunity to think again’, although he said any extension would be limited to a few weeks since the European Parliament elections take place on 23 May 2019.

The Lords backed an amendment specifying that the UK can replicate in domestic law any EU law made on or after exit day and can continue to take part in EU agencies. And they voted in favour of giving the Lords powers to refer statutory instruments back to the House of Commons.

Meanwhile, the House of Lords’ EU Justice Sub-Committee, led by Helena Kennedy QC, has issued a stark warning on the consequences of leaving the EU without effective dispute resolution systems in place.

In a report published last week, Dispute resolution and enforcement after Brexit, it warned that disagreements with the EU could be ‘potentially insoluble’ and individuals and businesses left without any ability to protect and enforce their rights. Moreover, without the jurisdiction of the CJEU, the government would have to agree multiple dispute resolution procedures.

Baroness Kennedy said: ‘We are really worried now about the lack of time.

‘This is difficult stuff, and unless both sides show real flexibility in the coming months, not only could the rights of businesses and individuals be threatened, but the whole Brexit withdrawal agreement could end up being potentially unenforceable.’

 

Issue: 7792 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll